Citation Nr: 9908068
Decision Date: 03/25/99 Archive Date: 03/31/99
DOCKET NO. 94-20 269 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St.
Petersburg, Florida
THE ISSUES
1. Entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric
disorder, to include schizophrenia, organic brain damage
claimed as due to in-service methylethylketone (MEK)
exposure, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
2. Entitlement to service connection for thyroid toxicosis
factia with marked tachycardia claimed as due to Agent Orange
exposure and inservice MEK exposure.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: The American Legion
WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL
Veteran and veteran's mother
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
C. L. Mason, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran served on active duty from March 1966 to December
1969. This case comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) on appeal from a January 1988 rating decision by the
St. Petersburg, Florida Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
Regional Office (RO). The Board notes that referral of the
case to the Board was deferred pending the promulgation of
regulations regarding Agent Orange claims. The veteran, his
mother, and his representative appeared before a hearing
office at a hearing at the RO in August 1997.
At his August 1997 hearing before a hearing officer at the
RO, the veteran raised the issue of entitlement to service
connection for impotence as a residual of Agent Orange
exposure. It does not appear that the RO has had an
opportunity to act upon this issue. All steps required for
jurisdiction have not been satisfied. Therefore, this issue
is referred to the RO for the appropriate action.
REMAND
The Board notes that in July 1998, the veteran submitted
copies of VA treatment records showing treatment from 1996 to
1998, which include a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress
disorder, in support of his claims. These records were not
considered by the RO in adjudicating his claims.
Additionally, the veteran on an August 1976 South Florida
State Hospital admission report indicated that he had been
hospitalized at the Miami, Florida VA Hospital from January
1976 to March 1976. Records of such a hospitalization are
not present in the claims folder. The VA's statutory duty to
assist includes obtaining all relevant treatment records,
which could potentially be helpful in resolving the veteran's
claim.
The Board observes that in the January 1998 rating decision,
the RO denied the veteran's claim for service connection for
PTSD on the basis that there was no diagnosis of PTSD of
record. There is a notation in an August 1982 psychological
evaluation for Dade Correctional Institution that PTSD was a
possibility. Moreover, the 1998 VA medical records contain a
diagnosis of PTSD. Service connection for PTSD requires
medical evidence establishing a clear diagnosis of the
condition, credible supporting evidence of an in-service
stressor(s), and a link established by medical evidence
between the in-service stressor(s) and the current PTSD. 38
C.F.R. § 3.304(f) (1998). The VA has a duty to assist the
veteran in the development of his claim. 38 U.S.C.A. §
5107(a) (West 1991).
Therefore, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following
development:
1. The RO should notify the veteran that
he may submit additional evidence and
argument in support of his claim and that
he should submit competent evidence
tending to link any current disability to
service. See Quarles v. Derwinski, 3
Vet. App. 129, 141 (1992).
2. The RO should request that relevant
copies of VA clinical documentation
pertaining to treatment of the veteran
at the Miami, Florida VA facility,
including a hospitalization from January
to March 1976, be forwarded for
incorporation in the record.
3. The RO should contact the veteran
and request that he provide details
about the events he claimed as stressors
such as the units he was assigned, the
dates of the occurrences of such events,
and specific places.
4. The RO should then review the file
and prepare a summary of all of the
claimed stressors. This summary and all
associated documents should be sent to
the U.S. Armed Services Center for
Research of Unit Records (USASCRUR),
7798 Cissna Road, Springfield, VA 22150.
See VA MANUAL M21-1, Part VI, Paragraph
7.46 (1992). The USASCRUR should be
requested to provide any information
available which might corroborate the
veteran's alleged stressors. If the
USASCRUR requires more specific
information to verify any of the
veteran's claimed stressors, the veteran
should be afforded another opportunity
to provide the required information. If
the veteran responds to the request for
additional information, the RO should
again request verification of the
claimed stressors from the USASCRUR or
other sources of information. The RO
should provide the USASCRUR or other
source of information with copies of the
veteran's service personnel records, the
DD Form 214, a copy of this remand, and
any additional information provided by
the veteran regarding his claimed
stressors.
5. If the USASCRUR is not able to
verify the veteran's claimed stressors,
the RO should contact the veteran and
request that he provide corroborating
evidence of his asserted in service
stressors. He should be advised that
this corroboration, if in the form of
lay statements, must be from person(s)
who witnessed the event or to whom he
related the event at the time it
occurred and not years later. To the
extent that he needs assistance in
locating these individuals, the RO
should provide what assistance is
possible.
6. If, and only if, the RO determines
that the record establishes the
existence of an in-service stressor or
stressors, then the RO should schedule a
special VA psychiatric examination to
determine the nature of any existing
psychiatric disorders. The entire
claims folder and a separate copy of
this remand must be reviewed by the
examiner prior to the examination. The
RO must specify for the examiner the
stressor or stressors that it has
determined are established by the record
and the examiner must be instructed that
only those event(s) may be considered
for the purpose of determining whether
exposure to a stressor in service has
resulted in current psychiatric symptoms
and whether the diagnostic criteria to
support the diagnosis of PTSD have been
satisfied. The examination report
should reflect review of pertinent
material in the claims folder. All
necessary studies or tests, to include
psychological testing and evaluation
such as the Mississippi Scale for
Combat-Related PTSD, should be
accomplished. If a diagnosis of PTSD is
deemed appropriate, the examiner should
specify the credible "stressors" that
caused the disorder and the evidence
relied upon to establish the existence
of the stressor(s). If additional
psychiatric disorders are identified,
the examiner should reconcile the
diagnoses and should specify which
symptoms are associated with each of the
disorder(s). If certain symptomatology
cannot be disassociated from one
disorder or another, it should be
specified. The report of the
examination should include a complete
rationale for all opinions expressed.
After the requested development has been accomplished to the
extent possible, the RO should again review the record. The
Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome of this
case. The veteran is free to submit additional evidence and
argument while the case is in remand status. See Quarles v.
Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 129, 141 (1992).
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment by the RO.
The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the
Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of
Appeals for Veterans Claims (known as the United States Court
of Veterans Appeals prior to March 1, 1999) for additional
development or other appropriate action must be handled in an
expeditious manner. See The Veterans' Benefits Improvements
Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-446, § 302, 108 Stat. 4645, 4658
(1994), 38 U.S.C.A. § 5101 (West Supp. 1998) (Historical and
Statutory Notes). In addition, VBA's Adjudication Procedure
Manual, M21-1, Part IV, directs the ROs to provide
expeditious handling of all cases that have been remanded by
the Board and the Court. See M21-1, Part IV, paras. 8.44-
8.45 and 38.02-38.03.
L. JENNIFER LANE
Acting Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (known as the United
States Court of Veterans Appeals prior to March 1, 1999).
This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does
not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your
appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (1998).
- 6 -